On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 09:23 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > We have %s and %b so that we can reconstruct the whole thing by > > > using both. It is unclear how %bT fits in this picture. I > > > wonder > > > if we also need another placeholder that expands to the body of > > > the > > > message without the trailer---otherwise the whole set would > > > become > > > incoherent, no? > > > > I'm not entirely sure what to do here. I just wanted a way to > > easily > > format "just the trailers" of a message. We could add something > > that > > formats just the non-trailers, that's not too difficult. Not really > > sure what I'd call it though. > > I was wondering if %(log:<name of a part>) was a better way to go. > > %(log:title) and %(log:body) would be equivalents of traditional %s > and %b, and %(log:body) in turn would be a shorter way to write > %(log:description)%+(log:trailer), i.e. show the message body, and > if there is a trailer block, add it after adding a blank line. > > Or something like that? That would work for me. Thanks, Jake